In the past, a "rule of thumb" method was utilized in predicting aircraft performance characteristics. With this technique, the pilot, based on previous experience, makes a reasonable estimate of the aircraft performance characteristics. Other past aircraft performance prediction systems include a custom performance computer which utilized "average parameters" for a predetermined model of an aircraft. This average parameter method is useful for only one aircraft type, and must be repeated for each new type of aircraft. These methods and systems have other inaccuracies associated therewith. For example, the rule of thumb method is very inaccurate since it is difficult to compensate for temperature of the air, weight of the aircraft, etc. Also, this method usually adds to the pilot workload at a time when the pilot is already very busy. The custom performance computer method, in addition to the average parameter disadvantage, does not account for manufacturing tolerances, a degradation of parameters resulting from age and usage, nor for different pilot techniques.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,070,458 to Gilmore, et al., entitled "Method of Analyzing and Predicting both Airplane and Engine Performance Characteristics," issued Dec. 3, 1991, describes a method which overcomes many of these disadvantages. This method makes performance predictions for an individual aircraft and engine using parameters which are learned from "flight to flight." The data, which is used by this method for predicting performance characteristics, is initialized with reasonable values of specific performance parameters. This method includes adjustment or updating of the specific performance parameters resulting from each flight of the aircraft. Thus, the performance characteristics of a given aircraft are learned from flight to flight for use in future flights of the given aircraft. The learned parameter technique thereby adjusts to changes in the aircraft due to aging, is tailored to a specific aircraft, and accounts for manufacturing tolerances. However, in Gilmore, et al., the modeling utilized and the computation of terms thereof are inefficient. In addition, Gilmore, et al. uses a model which separates thrust and drag terms of the model when making predictions and is somewhat limited in the number of outputs produced. For example, Gilmore does not provide for predictions of long range cruise speed or optimum altitude, which are important for achieving the best possible fuel efficiency.
In view of prior estimation and prediction systems, a need is apparent for a prediction system which provides an enhanced set of outputs for use by the pilot. In addition, the outputs, which may include outputs previously computed by prior systems, should be provided with greater speed and/or improved accuracy.